On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 07:59:02AM +1200, Steve Wray wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 13:50, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 07:42:48PM -0600, Dmitry Nikiforov wrote:
> > > So technically the whole purpose of this is to provide faster
> > > startup time after crash and not the consistency of data, correct?
> > yes
> > some fs' will journal all data though (reiserfs and ext3 can do
> > this), but it often comes at a significant performance penalty for no
> > real gain (and sometimes causes other problems like seeing old/stale
> > data)
> This is why I use ext3 with data=journal on /var/log
> I ran benchmarks comparing with data=writeback (supposed to be the
> fastest mode) and found that for the sort of writes that happen on
> /var/log you don't lose performance (and if one were writing enough
> data fast enough to /var/log to actually experience the performance
> hit, one would probably have worst problems than performance anyway).
> The advantage is that in event of a kernel panic or other hard lockup,
> one can actually find some useful hints in the logs as to what went
> wrong, instead of 'garbage binary data'.
you could always configure syslog to sync its logs after writing,
check your syslog.conf, it probably has most important logs prefixed
with a -
from the man page:
You may prefix each entry with the minus ``-'' sign to omit
syncing the file after every logging. Note that
you might lose information if the system crashes right behind a
write attempt. Nevertheless this might give
you back some performance, especially if you run programs that
use logging in a very verbose manner.
there is also chattr +S for important files/dirs.
-- Attached file included as plaintext by Ecartis --
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----